The Superior Court of Tulare County currently has five court locations: the Tulare County Courthouse and the Juvenile Justice Facility in Visalia, the Tulare-Pixley Court Building in the City of Tulare, the Porterville Government Center in Porterville, and the Dinuba Court Building in Dinuba. The Tulare County Courthouse is the main facility; the other facilities serve as branch court locations. Due to significant projected population growth in the Porterville area over the next 20 years, the court has envisioned the need to create two main service regions: a North Justice Center in Visalia and a South Justice Center based in Porterville. The new nine-courtroom Porterville Courthouse, to include the entire three-courtroom operation from the existing Porterville Government Center and one courtroom function from the Tulare-Pixley Court, will replace facilities that have poor security, are overcrowded, and have many physical problems.

This project, the new Porterville Courthouse, will become the South Justice Center of the county and will serve both limited and unlimited jurisdiction cases. In order to consolidate other court functions into the two regional justice centers, the court will divide the functions at the Tulare-Pixley and Dinuba locations into the North and South Justice Centers. Because of limited expansion options at the existing Porterville Government Center location, the new facility will be located on an independent site.

In August 2009, the City of Porterville agreed to sell to the state its 7.4-acre property at 300 East Olive Avenue, formerly the site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and Municipal Ballpark, for the new courthouse. In September 2009, the AOC received approval from the state Public Works Board for this acquisition. The real estate transaction closed escrow in December 2009. The City plans to relocate the fairgrounds to a location near the airport.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance

The AOC is the lead agency for preparation of an environmental report to comply with CEQA.

Due to significant projected population growth in the Porterville area over the next 20 years, the Superior Court of Tulare County has envisioned the need to create two main service regions: a North Justice Center in Visalia and a South Justice Center based in Porterville. The new nine-courtroom, three-story courthouse with a basement level will consolidate current court operations now located in the Porterville Government Center and the Tulare-Pixley Court Building, which is slated to close on September 1, 2012. The new courthouse will replace facilities that are overcrowded, have numerous physical and functional inefficiencies, and suffer from safety and security issues.

What is the plan for the new courthouse?

This project will serve the county’s growing need for court services, provide space for necessary expansion, enhance security, and consolidate court operations, enabling the court to greatly improve access and services for the southern half of the county.

The new nine-courtroom, 96,000 square-foot courthouse will be located in downtown Porterville at 300 East Olive Avenue. This is the former site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and the Municipal Ballpark. The City of Porterville sold the state several smaller properties totaling 8.1 acres with plans to relocate the fairgrounds to a site near the airport.

Was renovation considered before the plan to build a new courthouse was decided on?

Constructed in 1959 and expanded in 1974, the Porterville Government Center is a two-story masonry building with limited growth potential. The three-courtroom courthouse is far too small to meet the needs of the county’s growing population. Also, the Government Center and the soon-to-close Tulare-Pixley Court Building have numerous functional and efficiency problems which include:

Porterville’s small courtrooms cannot accommodate all litigating parties at the same time. Consequently, the public, attorneys, witnesses, and in-custody defendants must wait together in narrow hallways.

Most features such as service counters, courtrooms, restrooms, and the single elevator do not meet accessibility requirements. There are also numerous safety issues.

Deputies escort defendants in chains to courtrooms through non-secure judicial and staff corridors.

The roof is in poor condition and must be replaced.

The building lacks a fire sprinkler and alarm system.

Both facilities suffer from outdated HVAC, electric, and plumbing systems, undersized courtrooms and lack adequate space for public services, staff workspace, and storage.

Who is the Judicial Council, and why are they managing this project?

The Judicial Council is the policymaking body for the California court system, including the trial courts, known as “Superior Courts,” based in each county. Among other responsibilities, the council—through its Capital Program office—is responsible for planning, acquisition, design, renovation, and construction of court facilities. The new courthouse will be owned by the judicial branch.

How has the local community had input regarding the courthouse project?

During the site selection and acquisition phase, local members of the Project Advisory Group (including members of the Tulare Superior Court, local government representatives and other justice partners) viewed and ranked prospective sites based on standard criteria. In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act process enabled the public to review and comment on the environmental report before it was finalized. Community meetings were also held about the archeological study that was done on the site.Court leaders also previewed the courthouse’s design at City Council meetings.

What will happen to the current courthouse when the new courthouse is completed?

As the new South County Justice Center nears completion in the fall of 2013, the Judicial Council and the County will work together to explore options for use of the space that the court will be vacating in the current courthouse. More information.

In business since 1890, Sundt Construction, Inc. is 100 percent employee-owned and operated. It also has one of the most extensive employee training and development programs in the construction industry. The company has completed numerous educational, commercial, and civic construction projects, including courthouses in Mammoth Lakes, Kings County, and the Richard E. Arnason Justice Center in Pittsburg. Sundt has won numerous awards for its work in the public sector including the National Design-Build Excellence Award for Educational Facilities.

How was the contractor selected?

The Judicial Council uses the construction manager at risk (CMAR) method for delivery of major capital projects such as the new Tulare courthouse. The competitive selection process factors in qualitative criteria, such as the firm’s experience, as well as the contractor’s fee. The CMAR was retained early in the project for preconstruction services. Following a competitive bid for all subcontracts and the approval to award, the CMAR became the general contractor for the project. For this competitive selection, the Judicial Council received 12 submissions and conducted interviews with 6 short-listed firms, from which Sundt was selected.

What are the key milestones in building the courthouse?

A Request for Proposals is issued to find and secure the best qualified construction manager at risk (CMAR).

The CMAR in turn issues a request for proposals to qualified construction professionals to build the construction team.

The construction site is prepared, the foundation is poured, and the core of the building and protective shell are completed.

The building is enclosed and infrastructure systems are completed.

Interior fixtures and finishes are completed.

The newly constructed building undergoes quality control checks and the major systems are tested.

The finished new building is inspected and issued a certificate of occupancy.

When will the courthouse be completed and operational?

Construction began in February 2012; the courthouse is scheduled for completion in early fall 2013.

What are the Judicial Council's policies with regard to local hiring and purchasing during design and construction? How will members of the public find out about these opportunities?

Once bonds are sold for this project and it is ready to be put out to bid, the construction manager at risk will become the general contractor on the project. Prior to the project going into construction, the contractor will conduct an outreach to local subcontractors, ensuring that qualified local firms are fully aware of the bidding opportunity, process, and timeline. All qualified subcontractors, lower-tier subcontractors, and suppliers will be considered.

The new South Justice Center courthouse will be located at 300 East Olive Avenue on approximately seven acres, formerly the site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and Municipal Ballpark.

What was the process used to select the site?

Judicial Council staff worked closely with the Superior Court and with the Project Advisory Group, which includes judges, court staff, representatives from city and county government, justice partners, and the business community, to determine the preferred and alternate sites. The staff followed a standard site selection policy and process. The process involved objectively evaluating potential sites and selecting at least two sites that met agreed-upon criteria for the proposed new courthouse in providing access to justice for Stanislaus County, within the confines of the project’s budget and schedule. A cost reduction subcommittee of the Court Facilities Advisory Committee, which oversees the court construction program statewide, directed the project team to pursue the city block bounded by G and H Streets and 9th and 10th Streets in downtown Modesto as the preferred site. The presiding judge signed off on the preferred and alternate site, and the site selection was approved by the council's Administrative Director of the Courts and the State Public Works Board.

Why does the Judicial Council decide where the new court is built? Why isn't this a county decision?

Historically, trial courts functioned largely as county departments, but that changed in 2002, with passage of the Trial Court Facilities Act. This law made the State of California responsible for court facilities statewide, rather than the counties. The law gave the Judicial Council responsibility for facilities owned or occupied by the courts and made it responsible for operations, maintenance, and repairs, as well as site acquisition, planning, design, and construction of capital projects that replace or renovate courthouses. Council staff work closely with each affected Superior Court and justice agency stakeholders throughout the process of replacing or renovating courthouses. By Rules of Court, staff involve the public primarily through the Project Advisory Group, although depending on the needs of the project, public input may be sought at various stages.

There were reports that archaeological artifacts or human remains might have been buried on the site of the new courthouse. What steps did the Judicial Council take to safeguard any cultural resources?

After the CEQA report but before the start of any construction, the Judicial Council conducted an archaeological survey of the courthouse site. After consulting with the Native American Heritage Commission in 2011, the Judicial Council engaged a professional archaeology firm, which conducted a four-day investigation, testing at 37 different locations across the site. No human remains or culturally significant findings were discovered. A community meeting was held about the findings and the report was presented to the public for comment.

What environmental review was conducted on the site before it was developed

The Judicial Council is the lead agency for environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In April 2009, the Judicial Council issued a final mitigated negative declaration for the project. The mitigated negative declaration evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and recommends mitigation measures. Some of the mitigation measures applied during construction include watering disturbed earth to severely limit dust emissions, establishing protection zones around endangered wildlife and vegetation, and protecting the areas archaeological past, should the need arise.

Will the new building be energy efficient?

Yes. The building has been designed with attention to sustainability. Energy-efficiency features include a solar panel array on the roof and a system to store ice at night, taking advantage of off-peak power to minimize energy use in the building’s air-conditioning system. The building’s sustainability features will qualify it to receive LEED Silver certification by the U.S. Green Building Council.

The courthouse is being funded without impact to the state’s General Fund. The funds come from statewide increases in court user fees, authorized by the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002. This bill approved the issuance of lease-revenue bonds to fund this project, to be repaid by court fees, penalties, and assessments. Bonds were sold for this project in fall 2011.

How did the state arrive at its initial budget for the project?

Judicial Council staff develop each project budget by first determining the building size, site size, and number of parking spaces. Then it provides this information to a professional cost estimating firm that creates a hard construction cost for the building and site work. To this, council staff add all project soft costs, which includes all costs associated with evaluating, selecting, and acquiring a site, analysis required to comply with CEQA, the fee for the architecture and engineering team, geotechnical testing, project management and construction management fees, commissioning fees, and the cost of furniture, fixtures, and equipment.

How can the state afford a new courthouse at all, given current state finances?

The Porterville, Tulare County courthouse was authorized under the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002, which transferred responsibility for court facilities—their repair, renovation and construction—from counties to the state. To fund desperately needed renovations and repairs, penalty assessments and parking offense penalties were increased, and civil filing fee surcharges were created. This ensured a revenue stream to finance courthouse construction and renovations, promising these projects would be paid for from within the court system rather than drawing on the state's General Fund or local taxes. The state sold bonds for this project in November 2011. Once the courthouse is completed and occupied, the same revenue stream will repay those bonds over 35 years. This means that funds from other court jurisdictions will support Tulare County’s critical needs in years to come.

What is the impact of the state’s current budget crisis on this project?

Since 2009, $1.7 billion in court construction funds have been borrowed, swept to the General Fund, or redirected to court operations As a result, this project, as with other courthouse projects statewide, has been subjected to several delays, and has been required by the Judicial Council to undergo reductions to its construction budget, overseen by a statewide oversight committee of justices, judges, and public building experts. Funding of future phases of this project depends in part on what happens to court construction funds in future fiscal years.

Founded in 1986, CO Architects is now one of the largest firms in Los Angeles. The firm has broad experience in the civic, academic, science and technology, and healthcare sectors. CO Architects is also the architect on the Southeast Los Angeles Courthouse. The firm brings extensive experience in sustainable design to the project. CO Architects was recently ranked ninth as a Top Green Design Firm by California Construction.

How were the architects selected?

Judicial Council staff use a competitive selection process, factoring in qualitative criteria, such as the firm’s experience, as well as its fee. The architectural company is retained early in the project to begin preliminary drawings.

What are the key milestones in designing the courthouse?

A Request for Proposals is issued to find and secure the best qualified architect firm to begin the design process.

Once the design is complete and agreed upon, the preliminary plans are approved.

The design phase moves into working drawings.

Working drawings are approved and the project moves into construction.

Where can I see renderings of the new courthouse?

Renderings are posted on the project web page under the GALLERY tab.

Will the new courthouse be energy efficient and sustainably designed?

All courthouse projects are designed to receive the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification by the U.S. Green Building Council. This is a national standard for sustainable design. Energy efficiency is among its key criteria.

The Superior Court of Tulare County currently has five court locations: the Tulare County Courthouse and the Juvenile Justice Facility in Visalia, the Tulare-Pixley Court Building in the City of Tulare, the Porterville Government Center in Porterville, and the Dinuba Court Building in Dinuba. The Tulare County Courthouse is the main facility; the other facilities serve as branch court locations. Due to significant projected population growth in the Porterville area over the next 20 years, the court has envisioned the need to create two main service regions: a North Justice Center in Visalia and a South Justice Center based in Porterville. The new nine-courtroom Porterville Courthouse, to include the entire three-courtroom operation from the existing Porterville Government Center and one courtroom function from the Tulare-Pixley Court, will replace facilities that have poor security, are overcrowded, and have many physical problems.

This project, the new Porterville Courthouse, will become the South Justice Center of the county and will serve both limited and unlimited jurisdiction cases. In order to consolidate other court functions into the two regional justice centers, the court will divide the functions at the Tulare-Pixley and Dinuba locations into the North and South Justice Centers. Because of limited expansion options at the existing Porterville Government Center location, the new facility will be located on an independent site.

In August 2009, the City of Porterville agreed to sell to the state its 7.4-acre property at 300 East Olive Avenue, formerly the site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and Municipal Ballpark, for the new courthouse. In September 2009, the AOC received approval from the state Public Works Board for this acquisition. The real estate transaction closed escrow in December 2009. The City plans to relocate the fairgrounds to a location near the airport.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance

The AOC is the lead agency for preparation of an environmental report to comply with CEQA.

Due to significant projected population growth in the Porterville area over the next 20 years, the Superior Court of Tulare County has envisioned the need to create two main service regions: a North Justice Center in Visalia and a South Justice Center based in Porterville. The new nine-courtroom, three-story courthouse with a basement level will consolidate current court operations now located in the Porterville Government Center and the Tulare-Pixley Court Building, which is slated to close on September 1, 2012. The new courthouse will replace facilities that are overcrowded, have numerous physical and functional inefficiencies, and suffer from safety and security issues.

What is the plan for the new courthouse?

This project will serve the county’s growing need for court services, provide space for necessary expansion, enhance security, and consolidate court operations, enabling the court to greatly improve access and services for the southern half of the county.

The new nine-courtroom, 96,000 square-foot courthouse will be located in downtown Porterville at 300 East Olive Avenue. This is the former site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and the Municipal Ballpark. The City of Porterville sold the state several smaller properties totaling 8.1 acres with plans to relocate the fairgrounds to a site near the airport.

Was renovation considered before the plan to build a new courthouse was decided on?

Constructed in 1959 and expanded in 1974, the Porterville Government Center is a two-story masonry building with limited growth potential. The three-courtroom courthouse is far too small to meet the needs of the county’s growing population. Also, the Government Center and the soon-to-close Tulare-Pixley Court Building have numerous functional and efficiency problems which include:

Porterville’s small courtrooms cannot accommodate all litigating parties at the same time. Consequently, the public, attorneys, witnesses, and in-custody defendants must wait together in narrow hallways.

Most features such as service counters, courtrooms, restrooms, and the single elevator do not meet accessibility requirements. There are also numerous safety issues.

Deputies escort defendants in chains to courtrooms through non-secure judicial and staff corridors.

The roof is in poor condition and must be replaced.

The building lacks a fire sprinkler and alarm system.

Both facilities suffer from outdated HVAC, electric, and plumbing systems, undersized courtrooms and lack adequate space for public services, staff workspace, and storage.

Who is the Judicial Council, and why are they managing this project?

The Judicial Council is the policymaking body for the California court system, including the trial courts, known as “Superior Courts,” based in each county. Among other responsibilities, the council—through its Capital Program office—is responsible for planning, acquisition, design, renovation, and construction of court facilities. The new courthouse will be owned by the judicial branch.

How has the local community had input regarding the courthouse project?

During the site selection and acquisition phase, local members of the Project Advisory Group (including members of the Tulare Superior Court, local government representatives and other justice partners) viewed and ranked prospective sites based on standard criteria. In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act process enabled the public to review and comment on the environmental report before it was finalized. Community meetings were also held about the archeological study that was done on the site.Court leaders also previewed the courthouse’s design at City Council meetings.

What will happen to the current courthouse when the new courthouse is completed?

As the new South County Justice Center nears completion in the fall of 2013, the Judicial Council and the County will work together to explore options for use of the space that the court will be vacating in the current courthouse. More information.

In business since 1890, Sundt Construction, Inc. is 100 percent employee-owned and operated. It also has one of the most extensive employee training and development programs in the construction industry. The company has completed numerous educational, commercial, and civic construction projects, including courthouses in Mammoth Lakes, Kings County, and the Richard E. Arnason Justice Center in Pittsburg. Sundt has won numerous awards for its work in the public sector including the National Design-Build Excellence Award for Educational Facilities.

How was the contractor selected?

The Judicial Council uses the construction manager at risk (CMAR) method for delivery of major capital projects such as the new Tulare courthouse. The competitive selection process factors in qualitative criteria, such as the firm’s experience, as well as the contractor’s fee. The CMAR was retained early in the project for preconstruction services. Following a competitive bid for all subcontracts and the approval to award, the CMAR became the general contractor for the project. For this competitive selection, the Judicial Council received 12 submissions and conducted interviews with 6 short-listed firms, from which Sundt was selected.

What are the key milestones in building the courthouse?

A Request for Proposals is issued to find and secure the best qualified construction manager at risk (CMAR).

The CMAR in turn issues a request for proposals to qualified construction professionals to build the construction team.

The construction site is prepared, the foundation is poured, and the core of the building and protective shell are completed.

The building is enclosed and infrastructure systems are completed.

Interior fixtures and finishes are completed.

The newly constructed building undergoes quality control checks and the major systems are tested.

The finished new building is inspected and issued a certificate of occupancy.

When will the courthouse be completed and operational?

Construction began in February 2012; the courthouse is scheduled for completion in early fall 2013.

What are the Judicial Council's policies with regard to local hiring and purchasing during design and construction? How will members of the public find out about these opportunities?

Once bonds are sold for this project and it is ready to be put out to bid, the construction manager at risk will become the general contractor on the project. Prior to the project going into construction, the contractor will conduct an outreach to local subcontractors, ensuring that qualified local firms are fully aware of the bidding opportunity, process, and timeline. All qualified subcontractors, lower-tier subcontractors, and suppliers will be considered.

The new South Justice Center courthouse will be located at 300 East Olive Avenue on approximately seven acres, formerly the site of the Porterville Fairgrounds and Municipal Ballpark.

What was the process used to select the site?

Judicial Council staff worked closely with the Superior Court and with the Project Advisory Group, which includes judges, court staff, representatives from city and county government, justice partners, and the business community, to determine the preferred and alternate sites. The staff followed a standard site selection policy and process. The process involved objectively evaluating potential sites and selecting at least two sites that met agreed-upon criteria for the proposed new courthouse in providing access to justice for Stanislaus County, within the confines of the project’s budget and schedule. A cost reduction subcommittee of the Court Facilities Advisory Committee, which oversees the court construction program statewide, directed the project team to pursue the city block bounded by G and H Streets and 9th and 10th Streets in downtown Modesto as the preferred site. The presiding judge signed off on the preferred and alternate site, and the site selection was approved by the council's Administrative Director of the Courts and the State Public Works Board.

Why does the Judicial Council decide where the new court is built? Why isn't this a county decision?

Historically, trial courts functioned largely as county departments, but that changed in 2002, with passage of the Trial Court Facilities Act. This law made the State of California responsible for court facilities statewide, rather than the counties. The law gave the Judicial Council responsibility for facilities owned or occupied by the courts and made it responsible for operations, maintenance, and repairs, as well as site acquisition, planning, design, and construction of capital projects that replace or renovate courthouses. Council staff work closely with each affected Superior Court and justice agency stakeholders throughout the process of replacing or renovating courthouses. By Rules of Court, staff involve the public primarily through the Project Advisory Group, although depending on the needs of the project, public input may be sought at various stages.

There were reports that archaeological artifacts or human remains might have been buried on the site of the new courthouse. What steps did the Judicial Council take to safeguard any cultural resources?

After the CEQA report but before the start of any construction, the Judicial Council conducted an archaeological survey of the courthouse site. After consulting with the Native American Heritage Commission in 2011, the Judicial Council engaged a professional archaeology firm, which conducted a four-day investigation, testing at 37 different locations across the site. No human remains or culturally significant findings were discovered. A community meeting was held about the findings and the report was presented to the public for comment.

What environmental review was conducted on the site before it was developed

The Judicial Council is the lead agency for environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In April 2009, the Judicial Council issued a final mitigated negative declaration for the project. The mitigated negative declaration evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and recommends mitigation measures. Some of the mitigation measures applied during construction include watering disturbed earth to severely limit dust emissions, establishing protection zones around endangered wildlife and vegetation, and protecting the areas archaeological past, should the need arise.

Will the new building be energy efficient?

Yes. The building has been designed with attention to sustainability. Energy-efficiency features include a solar panel array on the roof and a system to store ice at night, taking advantage of off-peak power to minimize energy use in the building’s air-conditioning system. The building’s sustainability features will qualify it to receive LEED Silver certification by the U.S. Green Building Council.

The courthouse is being funded without impact to the state’s General Fund. The funds come from statewide increases in court user fees, authorized by the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002. This bill approved the issuance of lease-revenue bonds to fund this project, to be repaid by court fees, penalties, and assessments. Bonds were sold for this project in fall 2011.

How did the state arrive at its initial budget for the project?

Judicial Council staff develop each project budget by first determining the building size, site size, and number of parking spaces. Then it provides this information to a professional cost estimating firm that creates a hard construction cost for the building and site work. To this, council staff add all project soft costs, which includes all costs associated with evaluating, selecting, and acquiring a site, analysis required to comply with CEQA, the fee for the architecture and engineering team, geotechnical testing, project management and construction management fees, commissioning fees, and the cost of furniture, fixtures, and equipment.

How can the state afford a new courthouse at all, given current state finances?

The Porterville, Tulare County courthouse was authorized under the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002, which transferred responsibility for court facilities—their repair, renovation and construction—from counties to the state. To fund desperately needed renovations and repairs, penalty assessments and parking offense penalties were increased, and civil filing fee surcharges were created. This ensured a revenue stream to finance courthouse construction and renovations, promising these projects would be paid for from within the court system rather than drawing on the state's General Fund or local taxes. The state sold bonds for this project in November 2011. Once the courthouse is completed and occupied, the same revenue stream will repay those bonds over 35 years. This means that funds from other court jurisdictions will support Tulare County’s critical needs in years to come.

What is the impact of the state’s current budget crisis on this project?

Since 2009, $1.7 billion in court construction funds have been borrowed, swept to the General Fund, or redirected to court operations As a result, this project, as with other courthouse projects statewide, has been subjected to several delays, and has been required by the Judicial Council to undergo reductions to its construction budget, overseen by a statewide oversight committee of justices, judges, and public building experts. Funding of future phases of this project depends in part on what happens to court construction funds in future fiscal years.

Founded in 1986, CO Architects is now one of the largest firms in Los Angeles. The firm has broad experience in the civic, academic, science and technology, and healthcare sectors. CO Architects is also the architect on the Southeast Los Angeles Courthouse. The firm brings extensive experience in sustainable design to the project. CO Architects was recently ranked ninth as a Top Green Design Firm by California Construction.

How were the architects selected?

Judicial Council staff use a competitive selection process, factoring in qualitative criteria, such as the firm’s experience, as well as its fee. The architectural company is retained early in the project to begin preliminary drawings.

What are the key milestones in designing the courthouse?

A Request for Proposals is issued to find and secure the best qualified architect firm to begin the design process.

Once the design is complete and agreed upon, the preliminary plans are approved.

The design phase moves into working drawings.

Working drawings are approved and the project moves into construction.

Where can I see renderings of the new courthouse?

Renderings are posted on the project web page under the GALLERY tab.

Will the new courthouse be energy efficient and sustainably designed?

All courthouse projects are designed to receive the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver certification by the U.S. Green Building Council. This is a national standard for sustainable design. Energy efficiency is among its key criteria.